[NIFL-HEALTH:3638] Re: health literacy assessment

From: Forbis, Shalini (Shalini_Forbis@urmc.rochester.edu)
Date: Tue Apr 02 2002 - 10:33:40 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g32FXeu01350; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 10:33:40 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 10:33:40 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C8643065AF804@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Forbis, Shalini" <Shalini_Forbis@urmc.rochester.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-HEALTH:3638] Re: health literacy assessment
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text/plain;
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Status: O
Content-Length: 1528
Lines: 46

I do know that there has been work showing that the REALM scores were highly
correlated with
the PIAT-R, WRAT-R and SORT-R.  

The article is:  Davis TC, Long SW, Jackson RH, et al.  Rapid Estimate of
Adult Literacy in Medicine:  A Shortened Screening Instrument.  Fam Med
1993; 25:391-5.

Hope this helps you.

Shalini G. Forbis, MD
General Pediatric Fellow

Center for Child Health Research
1351 Mount Hope Avenue,
Suite 130
Rochester NY 14620
(716)275-1841
shalini_forbis@urmc.rochester.edu


-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Bennett [mailto:ibennett@mail.med.upenn.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 7:58 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: [NIFL-HEALTH:3636] Re: health literacy assessment


I am interested in what members of the list feel about current health
literacy assessment instruments.  I am getting ready to carry out a
study in which I look at possible associations between low literacy
skills and reproductive health status in an at-risk inner city
population.  I had originally planned to use the REALM but have recently
been considering the STOFHLA which is the short version of the TOFHLA (7
minutes).  Both of these are significantly limited when it comes to a
full evaluation of literacy but have the benefit of a reasonable amount
of time needed to administer.

Anyone have strong feelings one way or the other about these
instruments?

Anyone working on or know about another instrument which might more
comprehensively address the issues of literacy assessment more
completely?

Ian Bennett



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:41:30 EST